It can be setup anyway you wish. Historically it's been found useful to retain the results for an entire cycle at once for packages. When we removed older results, we got duplicate bugs and it was harder to see what had been touched and what had not. It would be interesting to have a discussion about how you want to use the tracker and what would be the most useful to you. It's likely we can make the changes you want without needing to make changes to the site/code. It would simply require a quorum among those who use it.
So do you want the package tracker to have milestones during the cycle? Reset once a month? Something else? What about having the old results bothers you? On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 1:26 PM, Walter Lapchynski <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm all ears, Nick! > > @wxl | http://polka.bike > Lubuntu Release Manager & Head of QA > Ubuntu PPC Point of Contact > Ubuntu Oregon Team Leader > Ubuntu Membership Board & LoCo Council Member > Eugene Unix & GNU/Linux User Group Co-organizer > On Aug 16, 2015 9:44 AM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On 16/08/15 17:27, Walter Lapchynski wrote: >> >>> >>> so it resets every month? >>> >>> No. >> >> It doesn't reset at all. Just finishes at cycle end and then starts again. >> >> Nick can tell you more about why it was set up as it is. >> >>> >>> @wxl | http://polka.bike >>> Lubuntu Release Manager & Head of QA >>> Ubuntu PPC Point of Contact >>> Ubuntu Oregon Team Leader >>> Ubuntu Membership Board & LoCo Council Member >>> Eugene Unix & GNU/Linux User Group Co-organizer >>> >>> On Aug 16, 2015 12:16 AM, <[email protected] <mailto: >>> [email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> On 15/08/15 16:35, Simon Quigley wrote: >>> >>> >>> If a test result for a package in week 1 of a dev cycle >>> shows a >>> fail and has a bug filed against it why is that invalid in >>> week 20 >>> if it hasn't been fixed? >>> >>> My point wasn't that. Then the QA person would have to >>> reattach the bug(not so hard if there was somewhat of a history). >>> >>> I'm not really sure how removing test results for a cycle >>> is useful. >>> >>> I would expect QA people to know if a bug reported against a >>> package is still relevant or not. >>> >>> >>> Because of regression. If there is package regression and the >>> QA tracker shows a passed result, then it would be a little >>> confusing to see a bug report >>> concerning the same package >>> by the same person, don't you think? >>> >>> >>> Or I would be pleased to be in a position to know that it was a >>> regression because I could simply see that the same thing passed >>> last month ;) >>> >>> >>> -- Have a nice day, >>> Simon Quigley >>> >>> >>> -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> <mailto:[email protected]> >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality >>> >>> >> -- >> Ubuntu-quality mailing list >> [email protected] >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality >> > -- Ubuntu-quality mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-quality
